Communicating highly divergent levels of scientific and social consensus: its effects on people’s scientific beliefs
Keiichi Kobayashi
Abstract
Open-access reader
Keiichi Kobayashi
Abstract
Open-access reader
This study examined the impact of presenting scientific and social consensus information together on people’s scientific beliefs when the two types of consensus information contradict each other. Japanese adults (N = 1,518) received information about high scientific consensus and low social consensus on the safety of genetically modified (GM) foods, information only about high scientific consensus, information only about low social consensus, or no consensus information. The presentation of only scientific or social consensus information had no effect on participants’ beliefs about the safety of GM foods, whereas the simultaneous presentation of scientific and social consensus information improved their beliefs in some degree. The effect of presenting scientific and social consensus information together was mediated by perceived scientific consensus.
OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This study examined the impact of presenting scientific and social consensus information together on people’s scientific beliefs when the two types of consensus information contradict each other. Japanese adults (N = 1,518) received information about high scientific consensus and low social consensus on the safety of genetically modified (GM) foods, information only about high scientific consensus, information only about low social consensus, or no consensus information. The presentation of only scientific or social consensus information had no effect on participants’ beliefs about the safety of GM foods, whereas the simultaneous presentation of scientific and social consensus information improved their beliefs in some degree. The effect of presenting scientific and social consensus information together was mediated by perceived scientific consensus.
Key concepts: Scientific consensus, Consensus theory, Scientific evidence, Psychology, Scientific literature, Social psychology, Presentation (obstetrics), Scientific communication